Floor Statements

I thank the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, we are here today because of an ill-conceived, dangerous, illegal, gun-running scheme called Operation Fast and Furious.

This operation has resulted in the death of at least one--maybe two-- Federal agents and in the deaths of hundreds of Mexican nationals; yet we still cannot get a straight answer from the Justice Department as to what happened. The Attorney General says he doesn't know who authorized this nonsense, but he won't let Congress help him find out the facts.

In December of last year, Attorney General Holder testified before the House Judiciary Committee and told me that Operation Fast and Furious was ``flawed and reckless'' and that it was ``probably true'' that more people were going to die.

Now, isn't that lovely?

Why is the Attorney General being so obstinate? After months of delay, delay, delay, today is the day of reckoning.

This administration claims to be the most transparent administration in history. So why won't the administration let the American people know what happened during Fast and Furious? What are they hiding?

This contempt resolution is about one thing. It's about finding out how such a stealth and dangerous operation could ever be authorized by the Government of the United States. Why would our government help smuggle guns to our neighbor and put them in the hands of the enemy of Mexico and the United States--the violent drug cartels?

And no wonder the Attorney General of Mexico wants those in the United States who are responsible to be extradited to Mexico and tried for those possible crimes. Mexico is more interested in Fast and Furious than is our own government.

As a former judge, I can tell you that contempt is used as a last resort to let individuals know they will comply with a lawful order whether they like it or not. Even the Attorney General cannot evade the law.

Time for America to find out the truth about gun smuggling to Mexico. Time for a little transparency. Today is judgment day.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, the Justice Department, with the aid of the ATF, facilitated the smuggling of over 2,000 weapons to the drug cartels south of the border--the national enemy in Mexico.

Hundreds of Mexican nationals died as a result of this operation.

Mexican Attorney General Morales says she was left in the dark about Operation Fast and Furious.

And she wants those officials who were involved to be extradited and sent to the U.S. for prosecution.

She is more interested in Fast and Furious than our own Attorney General.

Our own Attorney General says he still doesn't know who authorized this reckless and deadly operation and doesn't want any help from Congress to find the answers.

Tomorrow is the day of reckoning for AG as he still refuses to turn over the evidence.

What is he hiding? And why is he hiding it.

The time of hiding is over. It's time for Congress to hold someone accountable. We call it contempt.

Tomorrow is Judgment day for the Attorney General.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, the sun was lazily rising on the horizon. It was around breakfast time on a stunning Sunday morning. It was quiet, peaceful, calm. People felt secure. There was a small tropical breeze as the American flag was being raised on a nearby flagpole.

Suddenly over the horizon, a large formation of aircraft darkened the glistening sky. They broke formation and dove down from the sky, unleashing a fury of deadly, devastating bombs and torpedoes on a quiet place called Pearl Harbor in the Pacific Ocean. It was on that day, 70 years ago, when sailors, soldiers, airmen, and marines saw war declared on America. It was December 7, 1941.

Over 5,000 miles away from terror stood a small, quiet town covered in maroon decor known as College Station, Texas. College Station is not only home to Texas A&M University's Fightin' Texas Aggies, but also to the patriotic Corps of Cadets. Around campus you can spot the Corps of Cadets marching in sync wearing the uniform that matches their rank whether it is brown leather boots or trousers made of serge material.

December usually holds a brisk chill in the air in College Station, but the Texas sun kept the weather from being unbearable. Word traveled fast of chaos on the Pacific as America became engaged in another world war. Aggie tradition tells us that on that day teenagers turned soldiers when the entire 1942 junior class enlisted into the war along with half of their senior level comrades. They were all volunteers. They stood together as Aggies, brothers, Texans and Americans. They stood shoulder to shoulder and raised their right hands in unison and swore to defend their homeland. College Station became an image in a rear view mirror as pens and pencils were traded for guns and ammo. They left Texas to go fight on small islands in the Pacific, brutal deserts in North Africa and bloody beaches in Italy and France.

The year 1942 was also the time of the most well-known Aggie Muster under the command of General George Moore during World War II. Aggie Muster is on April 21st which also happens to be San Jacinto Day, the day Texas won independence at the battle of San Jacinto in 1836. Amid fierce enemy fire, General Moore and 25 fellow Aggies mustered in the trenches and caves on Corregidor in the Philippines. A war correspondent observed the make-shift ceremony and the world was introduced to the Aggie spirit. Every one of those Aggies were either killed or captured by the Japanese. Four years later when the Americans returned with Gen. McArthur and retook the island the Aggies mustered again. When I went to the Philippines recently, I saw a photo of those returning Aggies on the fortress wall of the Malinta Tunnel on Corregidor.

According to Aggie Muster tradition, ``if there is an A&M man in one hundred miles of you, you are expected to get together, eat a little, and live over the days you spent at the A&M College of Texas.'' During times of war, Muster is especially poignant. Texas A&M has produced more officers in the United States military than even West Point. It has the distinction, other than West Point, of having more Medal of Honor recipients than any other university in the United States. When General George Patton was in Europe going into combat in the Third Army, he made a comment about the Texas Aggies and the soldiers that he had under his command. He said, ``Give me an army of West Point graduates and I will win a battle. You give me a handful of Texas Aggies, and I will win the war.''

The Aggies' long tradition of duty and service to our great nation dates back to their beginning, to the days when A&M was an all-male military academy. Texas A&M trained nearly 4,000 troops during World War I and over 20,000 Aggies served in World War II, 14,000 as officers. World War II was hard. Millions served in uniform overseas; millions served on the home front; all sacrificed for the cause of America. Many of them gave their lives all over the globe in places known only to God.

The Aggie band doesn't play an Aggie ``Fight Song''. There is no such thing. The band plays the ``Aggie War Hymn'', quite a different concept. The ``Aggie War Hymn'' was written by Aggie Marine J.V. ``Pinky'' Wilson while standing guard on the Rhine River during World War I. It remains the most recognizable school war hymn across the country--probably the world.

Today, Muster is observed in more than 400 places worldwide and this year's ``Roll Call of the absent'' honored 970 people around the world, including those remarkable young men and women who gave their lives for our country in lands far far away. While Muster is a time to honor those that have died, it also is a time when Aggies, young and old, come together to reconnect and celebrate a way of life known only to those that proudly hail from Aggieland.

Muster means different things to different people. Every Aggie will tell you something different, something personal about what it means to them as an Aggie. One thing that is consistent in every answer is their dedication to tradition. It is the rich heritage of tradition that sets Texas A&M apart from all the rest. It is the Corps, the Aggie War Hymn, the 12th Man, Midnight Yell, Bonfire, Texas State pride

and as much as it pains me to say it--it's TU. It's the Fightin' Texas Aggie Band, Silver Taps and ``Hallabaloo, Canek, Canek.'' It's the Junction Boys, Howdy, Gig'em, Reveille, the Dixie Chicken and of course, the ring. But above all else--it's Muster.

Most of the junior class of '42 who fought in World War II have died as with most of the veterans of World War II. But, in Texas we remember them all this July 4th. Seventy years after, when America called they all answered to the sound of reveille.

There is nothing quite like an Aggie. Gig 'Em.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, like many Americans, my neighbors are concerned with the President's refusal to follow the Constitution.

James from Kingwood, Texas, wrote me this:

When, as an officer on activity duty, I took an oath to

support and defend the Constitution. I honored and still

honor that oath because I believe in this country and in the

constitutional form of government.

As near as I can see, the President is not enforcing the

laws he is required to do. If a military officer were found

selectively performing his duty, he would be court-martialed,

discharged, and dismissed from the service, as he should be.

Sir, how long does the President get to thumb his nose at

the Constitution and at Congress? The Congress must take

action now to support the Constitution, or we won't have a

Constitution.

Mr. Speaker, James is correct. The President is not supposed to make law by Executive edict from the palace of the White House, nor is the President to willfully refuse to enforce laws. Both actions are a violation the supreme law of the land, the Constitution.

And that's just the way it is.

I would like to thank the chairman for the time.

I especially want to thank Representative Fitzpatrick from Pennsylvania for introducing this important legislation, which makes improvements and reforms the Public Safety Officers' Benefits Program.

This program is intended to expedite the processing of claims and expand coverage to include some nonprofit emergency personnel who are currently not covered by this important program.

The reason H.R. 4018 is important is that 72 police officers were killed by perpetrators in 2011, and that number represents a 25 percent increase from the previous year and a 75 percent increase from 2008.

One of these 72 was 38-year-old Houston police officer George Will. He was killed by an out-of-control drunk driver. Officer Will was investigating an accident. The drunk driver comes barreling, out of control, down the freeway. Officer Will sees him coming and pushes a witness out of the way so that witness to the first accident wouldn't be hit. While doing so, the drunk driver ran over and killed Officer Will. He left behind a wife, two stepchildren; and the wife he left behind was pregnant. Also in 2011, a total of 61 on-duty firefighters were killed in the United States.

So, in 1 year, that's 133 families who don't have a father or a mother anymore.

And the last thing these families should have to worry about after facing

the loss of a father or mother first responder is financial instability.

Madam Speaker, in my career as a judge and a former prosecutor in Houston, I knew a lot of first responders. Some of them were later killed in public service to our communities. Our Nation's police, firefighters, and EMS workers are our true national treasures. They are the ones that run into burning buildings when everybody else runs out of those burning buildings. They are the ones that put their lives on the line every day to keep us safe and protect our communities. They go into the shadows and dark corners of our society looking for do-bads, outlaws, and social misfits. This work, Madam Speaker, is dangerous.

When these Americans wake up every day, they need to be able to focus on the duty they have before them, and they need to know that if, God forbid, something happens to them on their duty shift, that their family will be taken care of.

For all these reasons, I support H.R. 4018. I urge my colleagues to support it. And once again, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for this legislation.

And that's just the way it is.

I thank the gentleman from New York for yielding and for his work on this legislation.

I also want to thank subcommittee Chairwoman Miller for her work on this legislation. Both see the need to fix the gaps that are in our port security.

I want to thank the gentlelady from California (Ms. Hahn), who introduced this legislation. We are both alumni from the same school. I'm sure you've heard of it, Abilene Christian University in West Texas. The closest port to Abilene, I guess, is a boat dock at Fort Phantom Lake, if you want to call that a port.

But anyway, this bill is a good example of bipartisan work--of both sides of the House--on an issue that is important to all of us: security. This means national security and port security.

Congresswoman Hahn and I recently founded the Congressional Ports Caucus to raise awareness about ports in Congress and in our Nation. She represents west coast ports, and I represent ports in southeast Texas, on the gulf coast. We saw a need for a national discussion about ports because of their importance to the Nation and to our economy. Since we both have ports in our backyards, that is the reason the caucus was formed. We have over 65 Members in both parties from all regions across the United States. Some Members don't even have ports in their districts, but all see that ports are a national security issue.

One discussion we hope to continue through the caucus is the need to ensure that our ports are safe and secure. In meeting with industry groups and administration officials, it became evident to us that an updated plan on how ports should remain operational in the event of an attack really doesn't exist. There are gaps in our port security. The GAPS Act is an important step in addressing this existing problem in port security.

Any attack on our Nation's ports would be detrimental to the economy because ports play a large role in facilitating the flow of commerce. Most of the products in our stores arrive through ports and then are transported by other means to stores throughout the Nation. A crisis event causing a port to shut down would greatly affect our national commerce--money would be lost; businesses would lose revenue; and people would be out of work.

Both the chairman and ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee support this legislation, and I'm grateful for that. I urge all of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this legislation. Port security is not a partisan issue; it's a national security issue that we all should be concerned about.

Mr. Speaker, the events over the past six years in Thailand have left the country deeply divided. A military coup overthrew an elected government in 2006. Violent protests demanding new elections in 2010 led to the deaths of at least 90 people. Rich and poor, military and civilian, politician and voter--all have had differences over the years.

But, the newly elected party of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra promised to bridge those divides and lead Thailand towards a more stable and democratic future. For this country to move forward towards a more free and fair society, its leaders must push for political reconciliation between differing parties despite any opposition it may face today. The Thailand legislature is currently working its way through a political reconciliation bill. As it continues this process, the United States should be encouraged and hopeful in our ally's path to democracy and reconciliation. And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, the government continues to hide the evidence of the Fast and Furious gun running scheme.

The attorney general says he doesn't know who authorized this reckless and deadly operation, but he still conceals documents to show what occurred. The President claims he was not involved, but minutes before Congress began the process to hold the Attorney General in contempt, the President--``the leader of the most transparent administration in history''--desperately asserted executive privilege to withhold the documents from Congress.

According to The Washington Times, when the President was a Senator, he said this about the previous administration:

There has been a tendency on the part of the administration

to try to hide behind executive privilege every time there is

something a little shaky taking place. I think the

administration would best be served by coming clean on this.

There doesn't seem to be any national security involved.

Mr. Speaker, that was then, and this is now. And this President conveniently does exactly what he criticized others for doing.

So the saga of the Republic continues, and that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, our Nation's income tax system is a giant mess. It's complicated; it's not fair; it's outdated--and not everyone follows the law.

Hypothetically, suppose tomorrow, the President issued an edict from the White House directing the IRS not to enforce tax laws for certain special people, for example, people under the age of 30.

Why? Maybe the President just doesn't like the law, so he issues that new order. Well, Mr. Speaker, last Friday, much to the surprise of all of us who believe in the Constitution and in the separation of power, something very similar did happen.

In his latest Friday afternoon surprise, the President issued a decree unilaterally discarding the immigration law of the land--a law passed by Congress and signed by a previous President. The President disagrees with the law; and since he had to have his way, in spite of the Constitution, he improperly ordered his way to be the law of the land. The President's temporary amnesty plan applies to those who are under 30 years of age. They also can obtain a work permit.

It would be nice if the President were as concerned about the 23 million Americans who are looking for work in America as he is about the 12 million undocumented individuals the President claims are looking for work in America. News reports even show 50 percent of new American college graduates can't even find work.

Mr. Speaker, here is the chart we all probably saw in ninth grade civics classes: a bill is filed in the House. If the House of Representatives debates it and passes the bill, it goes down the hallway to the Senate, and they discuss it and vote on the bill. If they pass the bill, it becomes the law if the President signs it.

We call that ``the law of the land.''

But the President, it seems, has ignored most of this and has just issued new orders from the White House to not pay any attention to the Senate or to the House of Representatives.

Mr. Speaker, like most of us learned in ninth grade civics classes, it is Congress' job to write laws and the President's job to execute the laws. That means: enforce the law. It doesn't mean he is supposed to ignore laws and then issue his own policies like kings used to do with their policies. He is to follow the law whether he likes it or not. Once upon a time, the President even claimed to believe in the Constitution.

Here is what he said last year:

With respect to the notion that I can just suspend

deportations through executive order, that's just not the

case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has

passed.

But that was a year ago. That was then and this is now. If the President doesn't like a law, he believes he can ignore it and come up with his own set of rules.

Our Founders envisioned a country in which freedom was protected from government and was limited from the policies of kings. You see, old King George III of England constantly decreed new laws without the consent of the people. That was one of the reasons we rebelled against the merry ole King of England and his monarchy and his policies. Our ancestors structured the American Government in the Constitution. The last time I checked, it was Congress that makes laws and the job of the executive branch to enforce laws, not to ignore the ones it doesn't like.

The immigration system needs fixing. Congress should do its job and fix the problem. In the meantime, the President should do his job, not ours, and he should enforce the law. Otherwise, we have lawlessness in America.

The President says he can use prosecutorial discretion not to enforce immigration law. Mr. Speaker, the President is wrong again. I dealt with prosecutorial discretion as a former prosecutor and a judge. Prosecutorial discretion is when a prosecutor does not prosecute a specific case because the accused is innocent or there is insufficient evidence or witnesses have disappeared or the government has violated the rights of the accused, et cetera. Prosecutorial discretion cannot be used to ignore a specific law because the government just doesn't like the law.

It is true, through no fault of their own, that young undocumented individuals are here as a result of decades of a failed broken immigration system, but the President has no interest in fixing what is broken. He is more concerned with picking up a few votes to further his reelection. The law gets in the way, so his policies look like they come from an emperor instead of a President.

So what new orders will be issued next week from the President and the White House? Is he going to ignore the Tax Code for some in the name of prosecutorial discretion? I guess it depends on what political forces push the President to new orders and decrees.

We shall see.

Stay tuned for another day in the life of the Republic. It's time for the former constitutional professor to follow the Constitution, not to make up his own rules during his on-the-job training.

And that's just the way it is.

Madam Speaker, each year, Americans write a check to Uncle Sam in hopes that their money is going to the right places. Unfortunately, the Federal Government has lost credibility as the steward of taxpayer money.

In the past 3 years, millions of taxpayer dollars have been squandered in risky ``clean and green'' energy projects, and many of those companies have failed. And the beneficiaries of these shady ventures just happen to be the President's men. Enter Solyndra. Half a billion tax dollars subsidized a company that was doomed to fail. Eighteen hundred people lost their jobs, and Americans will never see the refund on their money. But the cronyism continues. Last week, the Department of Energy awarded $2 million to Solar Mosaic. The President's former green jobs czar, Van Jones, is an adviser to that company. Imagine that.

It's time to quit gambling taxpayer money on risky projects for all the President's men.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker:

With respect to the notion that I can just suspend

deportations through executive order, that's just not the

case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has

passed.

Mr. Speaker, that was President Obama a year ago. But that was then and this is now.

On Friday, the administration issued an imperial decree, acting to unilaterally ignore portions of the immigration law of the land. Mr. Speaker, the last time I checked, it was Congress who makes law, not the President. And it is the job of the Executive to enforce laws, not ignore the ones he just doesn't like.

The President has no interest in fixing the broken immigration system. Instead, he has decreed this temporary amnesty in hopes of winning votes in November. He doesn't like the constitutional process for law-making because it just gets in his way, so he acts like an emperor instead of a President.

It's time for the former constitutional professor to read the Constitution.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, on an early Sunday morning last May, one of Houston's finest, Officer Kevin Will, was investigating a hit- and-run accident. Suddenly, a different vehicle sped by and blazed past the police barriers at the accident where Officer Will was investigating. Immediately, before being struck, Officer Will yelled at a witness to jump out of the way, saving that citizen's life just before the officer's life was stolen from him. Only 38 years old, Officer Will left behind a pregnant wife and two stepchildren.

The driver of that speeding vehicle was foreign outlaw Johoan Rodriguez. The killer was in the United States illegally, having been deported once for another crime, but came back and committed another crime. This drunk and high driver blew through the safety lights of the police cruiser, striking and killing Officer Will.

Today, justice was served for Officer Kevin Will and his family. Johoan Rodriguez was sentenced to 55 years in prison. Let this be a statement to the lawless that criminal conduct is not accepted by Americans no matter where you are from. Those who wreak havoc on our communities and kill law enforcement officers will always be met by the long arm of American justice.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, each month I receive thousands of emails from my neighbors in Texas about issues that are important to them. Vera from Humble, Texas, wrote me this:

``American manufacturers do their part to improve the environment, and United States manufacturing is the leader in developing clean technologies. Policymakers should look very cautiously at new government programs that would expand environmental rules or impose entirely new regulatory regimes. The EPA's actions, such as those on ozone standards, chemical action plans, and cement emission regulations will increase costs, destroy jobs, and undermine U.S. manufacturers' ability to compete in the global marketplace. Our position and our prosperity will not hold if American manufacturing continues to be the victim of overregulation. Congress must commit to policies that ensure America's ability to compete and to succeed.''

Mr. Speaker, Vera is right. Regulators need to quit putting American businesses out of business because of unnecessary, expensive overregulation.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Speaker, growing up, I knew that my dad, when he was a teenager, fought in the ``Great World War II.'' Because my father never spoke much about it until recently, I was curious about what happened. My fascination with World War II began when I saw the movie ``The Longest Day'' as a kid. Young Americans--mainly boys, really--who had never been far from home were sent to a faraway land to free a people they had never met. They charged onto a beach through a hail of gunfire in order to stop the spreading threat of evil in Europe.

This action-packed movie depicts the graphic details of the longest day on June 6, 1944, D-day. Brigadier General Theodore Roosevelt, Jr., played by Henry Fonda in the movie, was the son of President Theodore Roosevelt. You remember President Roosevelt. He led the charge up San Juan Hill in the Spanish-American War.

Teddy, Jr., fought in World War I as well with his brothers. His brother Quentin, a fighter pilot, was killed in action. General Roosevelt was crippled from the wounds of World War I and had a heart condition, but he was not finished fighting. At the age of 56, General Roosevelt was the highest ranking officer that landed on the shores of Normandy. He was determined to lead this new generation of warriors-- who became the Greatest Generation--as they took on the Nazis.

His son Quentin Roosevelt II, named after Teddy Jr.'s late brother, the fighter pilot, was also on the beaches of Normandy that day. They were the only father and son duo known to fight on D-day. Roosevelt and his boys were part of Operation Overlord. The greatest invasion in history was expected to come at a high cost. And, it did. American youth gave their lives that day for the future of others.

Armed only with a walking stick and a pistol and under constant enemy fire, Roosevelt led several groups of 20-something Americans up Utah Beach and inland. General Omar Bradley described Roosevelt's actions as the ``single greatest act of courage'' he witnessed in the entire war.

On D-day, thousands of American boys charged out of the sea onto French soil, beginning the liberation of Western Europe. Our boys laid claim to the beachheads inch by bloody inch. The remarkable Army Rangers climbed the cliffs at Pointe due Hoc under heavy, brutal German fire. They had to.

Americans did not go to Normandy to conquer. They went and they sacrificed to ensure that Hitler would no longer be a threat. Hitler had little regard for American GIs. He was certain that the ``soft'' sons of America would never become soldiers. He thought the Nazi youth would be able to outfight the Boy Scouts. He was wrong. The Boy Scouts took them on D-day. The sand was stained red with the blood of American warriors and that of our allies.

Mr. Speaker, to my left is a photograph of the Cliffs of Normandy, where Americans are buried. In all, 9,387 Americans are buried at the top of the beach at Normandy. Buried on the cliffs, their white crosses and Stars of David shine and glisten in the morning sunshine over now peaceful Omaha and Utah Beaches. One of the ones buried there is the tallest warrior on the longest day, Brigadier General Theodore Roosevelt, Jr. This is his grave. It is at the front of Normandy. Fittingly, he is buried next to his brother Quentin. Quentin was the only person from World War I to be buried at Normandy. General Roosevelt, who died of a heart

attack shortly after the Normandy invasion, later received the Medal of Honor for his heroics at Normandy. In this photo is his cross in Normandy's cemetery.

Today, we express our gratitude to the Greatest Generation of Americans who defied danger and fearlessly fought for freedom.

Mr. Speaker, where does America get such people? They were the young breed, the rare breed, the American breed, who took to the treacherous beaches of Normandy under the leadership of a remarkable man who stood tall to lead his troops into battle on the longest day, Theodore Roosevelt, Jr., the tallest warrior.

And that's just the way it is.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment along with my friend from Pennsylvania, Mr. Altmire.

This amendment takes $10 million from the Office of the Under Secretary of Management of DHS and moves it to the border security, fencing infrastructure, and technology account with the purpose of being used for border cell phone communication infrastructure to help border residents disseminate border security-related information to the Border Patrol and law enforcement for their protection and the security of the border.

Mr. Chairman, the history goes back to March 27, 2010, when, in Arizona, Rob Krentz was murdered 20 miles north of the border in an isolated area in Arizona. The lack of communications capability made Krentz more vulnerable than he would have been otherwise and complicated the search for the assailant. His wife, Sue--who I've talked to on numerous occasions--believes that he was in a cell phone dead zone when he was killed and that he was trying to call for help at the time of his murder.

Before leaving office, Congresswoman Giffords had been working diligently on this specific issue. I became involved with her staff when they took the time to show me around the Arizona border and introduced me to the Krentz widow, Sue. I thank Gabby Giffords for her work on this issue, bringing it to my attention and other Members of Congress, and wish her well.

Mr. Chairman, these dead zones are so common that oftentimes border ranchers in Arizona and in Texas rely on shortwave radios to communicate or call for help.

The inability of the U.S. Government to secure the U.S.-Mexico border creates public safety hazards for residents who live on the border and the law enforcement agents who patrol them. Many border areas are rural and lack wireless communication capabilities like cellular phone service, making border security a public safety issue.

Last year, I worked with Congresswoman Giffords and Representative Altmire to pass a similar amendment to the Department of Homeland Security bill. We received overwhelming support in this House with a vote of 327 93, and I urge the House to support this initiative again.

However, the omnibus bill passed later that year weakened this provision to make it a mere suggestion for DHS to solve this problem. Despite that language, the Department of Homeland Security has done very little if anything to address this issue. More work needs to be done, and there is a large number of dead zones along our southern border. That's why this amendment is offered again this year.

Rural areas along the border present a unique public safety challenge that can be addressed through the extension of wireless communications into those areas. An additional $10 million can be used to enhance wireless communication capabilities that would allow residents to report threats against them and instances of illegal activities to law enforcement. Such capabilities would enhance communications among our law enforcement and our border protectors.

Richard Stana, Director of Homeland Security Issues at the Government Accountability Office, recently told the

Senate Homeland Security Committee that, as it stands right now, we have the ability to prevent or stop illegal entries into the U.S. for only 129 miles of the 1,954-mile U.S. border with Mexico. He continued to say that we have achieved, ``an acceptable level of control'' on 873 miles of the border. Whatever ``acceptable level of control'' means, I'm not sure.

In any event, that means 1,081 miles of the United States' border is a wide-open space, Mr. Chairman, and we simply cannot stop illegal crossings of any kind in those areas. The United States doesn't control that area of the border. Mexico does not either. I suspect it's the drug cartels that control that area of our sovereignty.

If the Federal Government is not going to secure the border, the least we can do is give the border residents a chance to call for help when they need help. Ten million dollars will go a long way in helping American citizens have a safer place to live and also allow them to communicate with law enforcement.

The Office of the Under Secretary of Management for DHS is funded at $213 million in the bill, and $10 million is a 4.5 percent reduction in that account. I think, as the ranking member said, to balance the equities, we need public safety as opposed to more funding for the Under Secretary for Management.

With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.